Skip to main content

matrix - Sparse Cholesky Decomposition


I am working with square matrices with a special form, which for large rank ($> 100,000$) would be best stored and manipulated as a SparseArray. I believe that the Cholesky decomposition of these matrices itself could also be sparse. The question I have is



How do I compute the sparse Cholesky decomposition of a sparse matrix without resorting to dense storage of the intermediates and result?



For purposes of illustration:



n = 5;
s = SparseArray[{{i_, i_} -> 2., {i_, j_} /; Abs[i - j] == 1-> -1.}, {n, n}];
s // MatrixForm

s


The CholeskyDecomposition function returns a dense matrix:


CholeskyDecomposition[s] // MatrixForm

Cholesky triangle


The CholeskyDecomposition documentation gives a lead: "Using LinearSolve will give a LinearSolveFunction that has a sparse Cholesky factorization".



ls = LinearSolve[s,"Method" -> "Cholesky"];
ls // InputForm

However, I'm stuck with what to do with this object to bring it in for the win.



Answer



LinearSolve[] actually computes a permuted Cholesky decomposition; that is, it performs the decomposition $\mathbf P^\top\mathbf A\mathbf P=\mathbf G^\top\mathbf G$. To extract $\mathbf P$ and $\mathbf G$, we need to use some undocumented properties. Here's a demo:


mat = SparseArray[{Band[{2, 1}] -> -1., Band[{1, 1}] -> 2.,
Band[{1, 2}] -> -1.}, {5, 5}];

ls = LinearSolve[mat, Method -> "Cholesky"];

g = ls["getU"]; (* upper triangular factor *)
perm = ls["getPermutations"][[1]]; (* permutation vector *)
p = SparseArray[MapIndexed[Append[#2, #1] -> 1 &, perm]]; (* permutation matrix *)

p.Transpose[g].g.Transpose[p] == mat (* check! *)
True



Here's a classical example of why permutation matrices are a must in sparse Cholesky decompositions.


Consider the following upper arrowhead matrix:



arr = SparseArray[{{1, j_} | {j_, 1} /; j != 1 -> -1., Band[{1, 1}] -> 3.}, {5, 5}];

ArrayPlot[arr]

upper arrowhead


Watch what happens after performing a Cholesky decomposition:


ArrayPlot[CholeskyDecomposition[arr]]

Cholesky triangle of upper arrowhead


Boom, fill-in. Imagine if this had been a $100\,000\times 100\,000$ upper arrowhead matrix!



If, however, we permute arr to a lower arrowhead matrix, like so:


exc = Reverse[IdentityMatrix[5]];
la = exc.arr.Transpose[exc];

ArrayPlot[CholeskyDecomposition[la]]

Cholesky triangle of lower arrowhead


What a difference a permutation makes!


For matrices with even more complicated sparsity patterns, it is doubtful if you can predict in advance that you won't get any disastrous fill-in if you insist on an unpermuted Cholesky triangle. Thus, all standard sparse Cholesky routines always perform some sort of permutation; though, as with any automatic routine of this sort, the permutation chosen might not be the most optimal, and yet yield something still good enough to work.


For reference, here's how LinearSolve[] does on an upper arrowhead:



lsar = LinearSolve[arr, Method -> "Cholesky"];
g = lsar["getU"];
ArrayPlot[g]

Cholesky triangle from LinearSolve


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.